Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 202 F.1d 883 - Blum v. Houser

Blum v. Houser’s Empirical Analysis

202 F. 883 · 1913

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
January 1933
most recently cited

9 federal appellate · 6 district ·

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently January 1933

9 federal appellate · 6 district ·

100191319201930decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Mueller v. Nugent · Fred Bardes v. First National Bank of Hawarden Iowa · Louisville Trust Company v. Leonard Comingor · Bryan v. Louis Bernheimer · Whitney v. Wenman

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The term 'colorable’ seems to have crept into the bankruptcy decisions without authority of statute, unless it be construed to mean merely that if a respondent sets up as facts, and not as conclusions of law, matters which, if true, would constitute a statement of an adverse claim, then the claim would be adverse and not colorable, and not within the jurisdiction of the referee. It can hardly have been the purpose of Congress to deprive a litigant of the benefit of a plenary hearing in cases involving the determination of contested questions of fact. Undoubtedly, one holding property of the bankrupt as an agent or bailee may be required summarily to turn it over to the trustee, and, in a proper ease, to a receiver; but we are of the opinion that, whenever the facts alleged on their face disclose possession and a legal right in the party claiming title, the referee has no jurisdiction in a summary proceeding to require the property to be turned over without the consent of the respondent. * * * “We are advised of no Supreme Court decision which recognizes jurisdiction of the District Court to deal summarily with the rights of one in possession and claiming title to property, as here, even though there be grave suspicions as to the bona fides of the claim.””
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. ““The decree of the District Court must be reversed, with directions to vacate the same and release further jurisdiction of the summary proceeding.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.